- From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 17:28:43 +0200
- To: www-validator@w3.org
olivier Thereaux wrote: > == Beta test for the W3C Markup Validator - version 0.8.0 beta 2 == With the check?uri= interface my torture tests all worked, including one HTML I18N test failing with beta 1 (now okay). > * Usability: more usable fatal error displays, removed "reset > form" button, rewordings, error message explanations... Oops, please don't do this for the "direct input" forms. It's kind of tricky to clean a textarea with Netscape 3.x, such old browsers assume that everybody offers "reset" buttons. IMO it's one of the rare cases where style="display:none" is acceptable. IIRC you had that in a global stylesheet for "reset" buttons (?) As it happens I verified that issue with an XML file, but that did not work. Somebody proposed to add "parse mode" buttons for this case, checking the source it's already there but commented out. The arrangement of the buttons is rather strange (without CSS), I see as 1st line "full", as 2nd line the "DOCTYPE" selection plus checkbox "only if missing", and as 3rd line the "fragment" radio button belonging to the 1st line. Without CSS I actually get two DOCTYPE choices, the selection for "full", and the simple HTML vs. XHTML for "fragment". Is that state of the art today, accessibilty requires CSS ? Serious question, no offense intended. > * New Feature: For non-xhtml XML documents without document type, > the validator will not try to perform validation and will only > check well-formedness Nice. Test, yes, it accepts a sitemap.xml as well-formed XML. Oops, a potential bug, I used "upload" for a *.kml file (some XML stuff used by Google Earth). My browser has no clue what *.kml is, it won't say "text/xml" when I upload it. The validator also has no clue what it is, but it says: | "This Page Is Valid (no Doctype found)" Important warnings (one): | Namespace Found in non-XML Document | | Namespace "" found, but document type is not XML! WTH did it validate, did this *.kml file happen to be valid SGML ? > If reporting a bug for this beta test, be sure to mark it as > belonging to version 0.8.0b1 ............................b2 Frank
Received on Sunday, 17 June 2007 16:07:39 UTC